Boxer and Kerry on Palin's op-ed and the truth about CNA

Per the Washington Times article, Barbara (don’t call me ma’am) Boxer and John (Halp me Kary) F. Kerry are at it again. So I thought I would do a little debunking of sorts.

In the article:

Palin asserts that job losses are "certain." Wrong. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and American Clean Energy and Security (or Aces) legislation will create significant employment opportunities across the country in a broad array of sectors linked to the clean energy economy. Studies at the federal level and by states have demonstrated clean energy job creation. A report by the Center for American Progress calculated that $150 billion in clean energy investments would create more than 1.7 million domestic and community-based jobs that can't be shipped overseas. Palin seems nostalgic for the campaign rally chant of "drill, baby, drill." But she ignores the fact that the United States has only 3 percent of the world's proven oil reserves, while we are responsible for 25 percent of the world's oil consumption.

The duo state that the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” and the “American Clean Energy and Security Legislation” are supposed to create jobs? Didn’t T. Boone Pickens just scrap his wind farms in Texas because they were not making any money? The Wind Farms are also behind on critical maintenance that even the environmentalists know about. And the fact is that you can not just jump into Wind-Farming jobs. There is no on the job training. So, do Barbara Boxer and John Kerry plan to send them to Wind Farm School? This is what it is paying for? I don't think Americans who have to pay for their own schooling would appreciate new energy like this.

Also, there is a EIA report, from the Official Energy Statistics from the U.S. Government that has a note with source on estimated Oil and Natural Gas Reserves posted on March 3rd, 2009 ... but only links the "sources" used, not actual information of where they base the formula, only how they base it. But if you click right here, there is no graph, formula, base, nothing on this link to show the public. So where is the duo getting their information? If you look at the "sources" though, you will see that most are published in 2008. FYI, British Petroleum uses data that is on a 3 year grid for these analysis that are usually two years behind the actual report. Which means they are going on data from 2006 and possibly early 2007. And the fact is, that if you look at the new 2009 BP analysis, they are basing it on 2008, when it is probably 2007 data they had retrieved.

Also there was this that caught my eye:

It will also help make America more secure. A May report (PDF) by retired U.S. generals and admirals found, "Our dependence on foreign oil reduces our international leverage, places our troops in dangerous global regions, funds nations and individuals who wish us harm, and weakens our economy; our dependency and inefficient use of oil also puts our troops at risk."

When looking at the report, I saw the names and looked into their backgrounds. In addition to  what is states on the PDF the duo provides, I added some links of interest.

VICE ADMIRAL RICHARD H. TRULY, USN: Current Independent Director, Xcel Energy (oil company)

GENERAL GORDON R. SULLIVAN, USA (RET.), IDA (Institute for Defense Analysis) Board of Trustees

REAR ADMIRAL DAVID R. OLIVER, JR., USN (RET.), Board of Directors, American Superconductor Corp (Wind power)

ADMIRAL JOHN B. NATHMAN, USN (RET.), Board of Directors, Burdeshaw (Defense contracting firm)

GENERAL ROBERT MAGNUS, USMC (RET.), Board of directors, EnerSys, (Leader in Battery technology)

VICE ADMIRAL DENNIS V. MCGINN, USN (RET.), Board of Directors, ACORE (American Council on Renewable Energy - Non-Profit), Supports PewTrust, (A Global Not-For-Profit Analysis Project for Global Warming)

DMIRAL T. JOSEPH LOPEZ, USN (RET.), Deputy Director, Spectrum (Defense, Merger and Acquisition Consulting), Board of Directors, NISC (Defense Interest Security Company), Board of Directors, EADS (Holding Company for Aerospace and Defense)

GENERAL RONALD E. KEYS, USAF (RET.), Advisor Bipartisan Project for National Security Initiative.

GENERAL PAUL J. KERN, USA (RET.), Director of ITT Corp and others besides Cohan Group.

LIEUTENANT GENERAL LAWRENCE P. FARRELL JR., USAF (RET.), Director of NCDMM

GENERAL CHARLES G. BOYD, USAF (RET.), President and CEO of BENS (Business Executives for National Security)

GENERAL CHARLES F. “CHUCK” WALD, USAF (RET.), Board of Directors, Bipartisan Policy Center

If you click on every one of those links, they either deal with Defense, Environmentalism and/or Money in a non-profit way, besides all serving on the CNA. All of these men also seem to have been in multiple groups while working in D.C., and all intermingle. What does Defense have to do with Renewable Resources though? I thought it was this interesting PDF, until I saw this PDF from ACORE... and what is ACORE? The American Council on Renewable Energy, whose BOD is Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn.

All of these men on the CNA board are going to profit well from the Federal Government for a initiative on "Clean Energy" and breaking down the Dept of Defense. Nice, huh? Quite a bit of conflict of interest in my opinion.

But back to Barbara "don't call me ma'am" Boxer and John "Kary halp me" Kerry:

Per the article:

"We are already working every day in the Senate to pass legislation that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, create millions of clean energy jobs and
protect our children from pollution. We respectfully invite Gov. Palin to join
that reality-based debate -- one that relies on facts, science, tested economics
and steely-eyed national security interests. Our country needs nothing less, and
our planet depends on it."

What is interesting is that I have looked up this whole article and find that the only people who are going to profit are those who are either on the CNA board and the Federal Government, as the "normal American citizens" that Sarah Palin represented in Alaska as well as the Nation, will be paying for it as usual. It won't reduce the cost of oil as it will skyrocket and will keep rising due to increased industrial use by China and India.

The Heritage Foundation has this excellent analysis  showing job losses that would be caused by Cap and Trade.

Sarah Palin was right, and unfortunately we are going to see a very corrupt end product.

-u